Focusing on guns, politics, and news of interest, here is today's Second Amendment News Roundup:
CNS News reports that Sonia Sotomayor stated in hearings this morning that the verdict is out on the 2nd Amendment and that it does not apply to the states. Uh, funny how the 14th Amendment is taken to apply to every single right in the BILL OF RIGHTS except 1--the Second Amendment. Sotomayor wants it to stay that way, which begs the question as to why the NRA failed to throw its full weight behind opposing this travesty of a nominee.
The War on Guns weighs in on the Sotomayor/Obama attack on gun rights. And if our 'progressive NRA friends' cannot stop THIS nominee, how do they think they can stop the next one, who WILL shift the Supreme Court to the Left in favor gun control and limited the 2nd Amendment? The Dems now have a 60-seat super-majority. They WILL confirm whoever Obama puts before them. Do you honestly expect the next one will be any less a danger to gun rights?
Sebastian live-blogs the Sotomayor exchange on guns and provides some insightful comments. But I must be quick to point out that the argument 'but she's only replacing Souter who wouldn't be our friend anyway' is a fallacious notion. When Sotomayor is confirmed, the gun rights community (the NRA in particular) WILL regret not vehemently opposing her when Obama chooses his next Court nominee who will be just as bad if not worse.
Conservative Libertarian Outpost posts a special alert on Sotomayor from Gun Owners of America--the ONLY national gun rights advocacy organization that actively opposed and lobbied Senators to oppose Sotomayor.
Free in Idaho presents the only question that really needs an answer from Sonia Sotomayor. A good read!
Days of our Trailers notes that it's very telling that a certain organization we all know and love (yeah, right) has endorsed Sonia Sotomayer for SCOTUS.
Texas Fred has been at the forefront of the battle against Sotomayor, and posts a letter he received today from Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson on the matter and relays this information from Senator John Cornyn.
Ride Fast and Shoot Straight says that Californians are 'gunning up' just like everyone else. I see a renewed run on the gun shops in light of the real possibility that Obama will succeed in turning the Supreme Court anti-gun.
Breda has the scoop on tonight's edition of Gun Nuts Radio.
Bloviating Zeppelin says that history proves that environmental regulations kill commerce, jobs, and cause costs to skyrocket.
The Rustmeister informs us of the real reason restaurant owners don't want gun owners to carry in their businesses.
1 With a Bullet blogs on 'the Wild Bunch Holster.' Interesting!
Say Uncle reports that Arizona's GOP Governor has expanded gun rights in the state. Good!
Standing By says that Obama's bailed out fascist mixture of government and business at Goldman-Sachs is at the center of the push for the cap and trade energy tax. I would also note that so is GE, the owner of NBC News and its subsidiaries.
Western Rifle Shooters Association takes a chilling look at a new 'Czar' Obama has appointed--a savage who puts to shame Hitler's 'doctors' who performed experiments on political prisoners and Jews.
Brigid shares a beautifully-written poem entitled, 'The Wolf Is In My Soul.' Don't pass this up!
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Bitter is live blogging the hearings, not Sebastian. Plus, the link is broke. Carry on, sir.
Sorry about that. I noticed the link was bumped up to today for breaking updates on the hearings. It'll be fixed for today's Roundup.
Re: real reason at Rustmeister's....
my comment; straightarrow said...
Wrong! A nice plausible theory, but wrong. The real reason they want to derail laws allowing carry in establishments that serve alcohol is so that they may employ the guns of the state to force all owners such establishments from permitting the carry of arms. That way they don't have to take a stand that may cost them customers. Either the timid illogical who believe the "blood in the sawdust" crap if they allow carry in their place of business or the man who elects to carry and takes himself and his family to a business more accepting of his rights.
It is ironic that they would try to get government to enforce, at gunpoint, lack of competition for clientele, all the while proclaiming that it is a public safety issue. NO, IT ISN'T. It is a non-compete issue, and they don't want to have to declare a position.
Post a Comment